Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new SCES will be at Parkside.

Take the hint people.

This is what they said in the 2018 report-- do we think it would still be considered less desirable/too expensive?

"Parkside Elementary School is a former elementary school site and closed in 1976. The 11.60-acre
portion of the 15.60-acre candidate site was deeded to Montgomery County Government the same
year. The remaining approximately 4-acre portion of the 15.60-acre candidate site is owned by
M-NCPPC. The publicly-owned candidate site is one of the more challenging to develop as a new
elementary school primarily because of steep slopes, forested areas, limited access, and wetlands.
Any new school on this site would have to include use of the heavily forested County-owned portion
of the site; the eastern portion houses a child care center and the western portion houses the M-NCPPC
Parks Division Headquarters. As a result of the environmental issues and site constraints, the SSAC
believed this site would be costly and difficult to redevelop as a new elementary school."

and with $10 million going to a new pool. This is more than MCPS intends to invest in the entire SSIMS/SCES facility to make it functional for the next 5 years and then turn it into a holding school indefinitely.

And yeah, Parkside was considered to be not ideal for environmental reasons. I don't know how you fix that.
It's amazing how just a few short years can change perspectives, as is the case now with SCES.

This happens elsewhere. In 2017, MCPS was going to put an addition onto Piney Branch ES. There was no problem with the classroom and floor configurations back then. MCPS decided not to make the addition because the school population predictions did not warrant it. Fast forward to 2025, and suddenly the school is a poorly designed mess of a school and must be rebuilt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

What’s inequitable about it? Don’t know the boundaries.

It is one of the wealthiest schools in the immediate area. It directly borders a title 1 school (ESS) as well as two focus schools (Woodlin and highland view). French immersion definitely keeps farms down at SCES, but the disparity is greater than that. The border is also wonky in shape and not intuitive on its own. Tbh I don’t actually think there needs to be an ES in the current spot — kids who walk to SCES could mostly walk to ESS or HV.

First, Woodlin is not a Focus school. It's FARMS rate as compared to other Silver Spring schools has it only above Rock Creek Forest (which includes Spanish immersion) and below Pine Crest, Rosemary Hills, Piney Branch, and Takoma Park ES. Second, I've had kids in both the French Immersion and "academy" (neighborhood) program and it's absolutely true that the FI program brings the FARMS rate down considerably. Without FI the FARMS rate would likely be a bit higher than Woodlin's.

Not sure why else you think the boundaries make "zero sense" or are "inequitable" although it's true that on the easternmost edge of the catchment, ESS is slightly walkable. Oak View and Highland View are also sort of walkable from certain areas (if you consider a mile to be walkable) but that doesn't necessarily mean the boundaries are nonsensical. It means there are a lot of elementary-aged children concentrated in 20910 and environs. I don't think any of these schools are severely undercapacity.

I live on the ESS/SCES border and have had kids attend both schools. ESS is not slightly but highly walkable for the SCES zone south of Wayne. SCES is so much nicer than ESS (much nicer and better funded PTA) and it is absolutely tragic given the proximity. All the affordable housing complexes are zoned for ESS, which makes PP’s claim that SCES is THE elementary school serving the urban core of DTSS problematic. Of course FI changes the balance at SCES. Looking at the numbers, I don’t think it fully accounts for the inequity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the meeting on Tuesday night, Taylor said it was important to think about the number of staff who currently use the Metro to get to work.

Wouldn't that point towards keeping SSIMS/SCES? I thought he hates/fears public transit? What point was he trying to make?

The only thing you can count win with Thomas Taylor is that he gaslights everyone. Everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the meeting on Tuesday night, Taylor said it was important to think about the number of staff who currently use the Metro to get to work.

Wouldn't that point towards keeping SSIMS/SCES? I thought he hates/fears public transit? What point was he trying to make?

Anonymous wrote:At the meeting on Tuesday night, Taylor said it was important to think about the number of staff who currently use the Metro to get to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new SCES will be at Parkside.

Take the hint people.

This is what they said in the 2018 report-- do we think it would still be considered less desirable/too expensive?

"Parkside Elementary School is a former elementary school site and closed in 1976. The 11.60-acre
portion of the 15.60-acre candidate site was deeded to Montgomery County Government the same
year. The remaining approximately 4-acre portion of the 15.60-acre candidate site is owned by
M-NCPPC. The publicly-owned candidate site is one of the more challenging to develop as a new
elementary school primarily because of steep slopes, forested areas, limited access, and wetlands.
Any new school on this site would have to include use of the heavily forested County-owned portion
of the site; the eastern portion houses a child care center and the western portion houses the M-NCPPC
Parks Division Headquarters. As a result of the environmental issues and site constraints, the SSAC
believed this site would be costly and difficult to redevelop as a new elementary school."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

I am against the proposals but I do agree with this. It’s a community so it’s sad, but the boundaries should change regardless.

SCES boundaries are a completely different conversation than the proposal to turn the school into a holding school. An elementary boundary study is coming, and likely many boundaries will change, including Sligo Creek's, which no one is arguing with.

What's at stake here is taking the only two schools in the urban core of Silver Spring and turning them into holding schools. That would mean every kid who walks to those schools now would take a bus, and every kid who comes to the site once it's a holding school would also arrive by bus. You are talking about adding 40+ busses per day to an already dense and congested area -- an area that the council and state have invested billions in with the new Purple Line to turn it into a walkable urban community. This is a short-sighted, urban planning nightmare.

I oppose the proposal. I think your argument is much stronger in the case of the middle school, since ESS in particular is so close to SCES but also HV….
Which neighborhoods specifically can walk to SCES but not one of those two?

I agree that the bigger loss for the community is the closure of SSIMS than the relocation of SCES. Losing an entire middle school and making Eastern 1,500 kids is a major loss for the east part of the county. No argument there.

When it comes to the elementary schools, I think MCPS needs to wait to do the boundary study before building a new SCES. Their own data says that the DCC will have 3,000 empty elementary school seats by 2031. Instead of dropping $70.5 million on a new SCES, why not use the boundary study to consolidate kids at existing elementary schools (many of which you point out are close to one another) and create a holding school that way?

And I think traffic congestion, safety, surrounding neighborhood, and access to public transit should all be taken into consideration when deciding which school should become a holding school. It simply does not make sense (and is downright dangerous) to add that many busses to downtown Silver Spring every day. This shouldn't be something MCPS is unilaterally allowed to do. I'm hoping the Council steps in to vote this down as 1) fiscally irresponsible and 2) in direct conflict with their own investments into smart growth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

What’s inequitable about it? Don’t know the boundaries.

It is one of the wealthiest schools in the immediate area. It directly borders a title 1 school (ESS) as well as two focus schools (Woodlin and highland view). French immersion definitely keeps farms down at SCES, but the disparity is greater than that. The border is also wonky in shape and not intuitive on its own. Tbh I don’t actually think there needs to be an ES in the current spot — kids who walk to SCES could mostly walk to ESS or HV.

First, Woodlin is not a Focus school. It's FARMS rate as compared to other Silver Spring schools has it only above Rock Creek Forest (which includes Spanish immersion) and below Pine Crest, Rosemary Hills, Piney Branch, and Takoma Park ES. Second, I've had kids in both the French Immersion and "academy" (neighborhood) program and it's absolutely true that the FI program brings the FARMS rate down considerably. Without FI the FARMS rate would likely be a bit higher than Woodlin's.

Not sure why else you think the boundaries make "zero sense" or are "inequitable" although it's true that on the easternmost edge of the catchment, ESS is slightly walkable. Oak View and Highland View are also sort of walkable from certain areas (if you consider a mile to be walkable) but that doesn't necessarily mean the boundaries are nonsensical. It means there are a lot of elementary-aged children concentrated in 20910 and environs. I don't think any of these schools are severely undercapacity.

Anonymous wrote:The new SCES will be at Parkside.

Take the hint people.

Anonymous wrote:The new SCES will be at Parkside.

Take the hint people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

What’s inequitable about it? Don’t know the boundaries.

It is one of the wealthiest schools in the immediate area. It directly borders a title 1 school (ESS) as well as two focus schools (Woodlin and highland view). French immersion definitely keeps farms down at SCES, but the disparity is greater than that. The border is also wonky in shape and not intuitive on its own. Tbh I don’t actually think there needs to be an ES in the current spot — kids who walk to SCES could mostly walk to ESS or HV.

First, Woodlin is not a Focus school. It's FARMS rate as compared to other Silver Spring schools has it only above Rock Creek Forest (which includes Spanish immersion) and below Pine Crest, Rosemary Hills, Piney Branch, and Takoma Park ES. Second, I've had kids in both the French Immersion and "academy" (neighborhood) program and it's absolutely true that the FI program brings the FARMS rate down considerably. Without FI the FARMS rate would likely be a bit higher than Woodlin's.

Not sure why else you think the boundaries make "zero sense" or are "inequitable" although it's true that on the easternmost edge of the catchment, ESS is slightly walkable. Oak View and Highland View are also sort of walkable from certain areas (if you consider a mile to be walkable) but that doesn't necessarily mean the boundaries are nonsensical. It means there are a lot of elementary-aged children concentrated in 20910 and environs. I don't think any of these schools are severely undercapacity.